John Edwards, Sam Nunn on Obama's VP List

Rep. Carolyn Cheeks Kilpatrick, D-Mich., who leads the Congressional Black Caucus, said members of her caucus asked her to forward the names of Edwards and Nunn when she met Wednesday with Obama's vice presidential search team. The team, Caroline Kennedy and Eric Holder, indicated the two were on the list.

What Obama's committee is looking for:

"I asked them what type of person the senator is looking for? And they said in general someone who could help him rebuild the country ... talking about change. How we reinvest in America, get people back to work and reinforce our education system and bring the jobs back," she said.

More....

As to Edwards' strengths:

Edwards, a former North Carolina senator who was John Kerry's running mate in 2004, could help Obama appeal to white, working-class voters who largely favored Clinton in the primary and will be a critical voting bloc in the general election. The drawback is that Edwards was the vice presidential nominee on a losing ticket four years ago, while Obama's campaign is about turning the page.

Edwards has said he is not seeking the vice presidency — but hasn't ruled out accepting if asked.

As to Sam Nunn:

Nunn would bring national security credentials to the ticket, having served as the longtime Armed Services Committee chairman. The former Georgia senator is a member of Obama's foreign policy advisory group.

But Nunn has not been in office for more than a decade so he is not well-known nationally. He is a conservative Democrat who supported school prayer and opposed gays in the military, while Obama tends to have a more liberal viewpoint. Nunn will turn 70 in September.

Who else is on the list?

Other lawmakers who have been briefed say there about 20 names on the list Obama's team has been discussing. The list includes current elected officials, former elected officials and retired military generals, lawmakers have said.

for a ticket with Sam Nunn, any more than I would vote for a ticket with a Republican on it. I recall very well his role in '93 with DADT. I will not be responsible for putting him into elected office for dog catcher, let alone the Vice-Presidency.

I've decided my vote is Obama's to lose. About the only way he could lose it between now and November is to pick a VP that's unacceptable to me. Nunn is one of those.

I knew more openly gay people for Obama (2 whole people) than I did Latinos for Obama or Asians for Obama (0 apeice). Now frankly, I had about as much respect for LGBT for Obama folks as I do LGBT for Bush folks. But that was the primary, this is the general. What I heard is that there were many gays who voted for Obama out of anger at Bill for DADT. I have a feeling that not a single one will bat an eyelash if Obama picks Nunn for the VP.

But I will care and I believe a whole lot of other LGBT people out there will care as well.

Now frankly, I had about as much respect for LGBT for Obama folks as I do LGBT for Bush folks.

I have zero respect for gay voters who expect anything other than token, minimal change at the federal level from the Democratic Party. Our two gay, pro-Clinton representatives have certainly not been "change we can believe in." Similarly, I have no respect from people such as yourself who would compare me to a gay voter going for Bush.

I doubt Obama will select Nunn. Regardless, Nunn claims it is time to reexamine and reevaluate this issue. Indeed, his line is the same line on DADT I heard from Clinton supporters: it was progress in 1993. Perhaps, say, as Clinton has evolved on these issues?

Of course, since DADT is codified as a statute, a fact often overlooked by candidates and critics alike, it will require support in Congress. But then, why let reality get in the way of a good rant?

Cooper, bad actors from the 1990s, who blocked Bill Clinton's more progressive agenda early on and forced him back into more defensive positions. Why do their names keep coming up in connection with Senator Obama? Why doesn't that bother his more vociferous supporters? Everytime someone says "Sam Nunn" in the same sentence as "Vice President" (or "Jim Cooper" in the same sentence as "health care reform"...) the sad excuse for a unity pony I was issued (reminds me a bit of the Grinch's dog with antlers in lieu of a real reindeer) gets another kick in the hindquarters. I get that I don't matter, but holy jeebus, batman. Sam Nunn?

I managed to follow it. Have a family friend in the marketing biz which we talk about from time to time. High end marketing campaigns are REALLY interesting. I'll be bringing this to her when we next get together.

Nunn is entirely responsible for don't ask don't tell and was trying to drive all gays out of the military. He is unacceptable and the fact that Obama is even considering him is appalling to me.

"When Bill Clinton sought to keep his 1992 campaign promise to end the ban on gays and lesbians serving openly in the military, he met strong resistance in the Pentagon and on Capitol Hill. Nunn, one of the most adamant opponents, led a series of hearings that were stacked against ending the prohibition. Critics noted that Nunn held more hearings about and spent more time on gays in the military than he had on the defense budget or even the Navy's Tailhook sexual harassment scandal" Capehart editorial against Nunn
For his part, Nunn let it be known last week that he thought "don't ask, don't tell" should be revisited. "I'm not advocating anything, except I'm saying the policy was the right policy for the right time, and times change," he said. "It's appropriate to take another look." An attempt at inoculation in case the VP vetters come calling?

Jeff Soref, former chairman of the DNC's LGBT caucus, isn't buying it. " 'Revisiting' is not admitting a mistake or apologizing for the pain he inflicted or the tens of thousands of lives affected by the policy," said the Clinton supporter. "Surely there are more compelling choices out there" for vice president, "starting with Hillary Clinton."

Not really the best press he could be getting. I like Edwards a lot too, but I think as a VP given 2004 would be a bad choice. Not that 2004 was his fault, I think I could have won against Bush if he were on the top of the ticket, but that's the DNC for you. And Nunn? Wow. What are those people smoking and can I get some.

I think the obvious choice is Clark. It would tick me off a bit because I'm secretly hoping for Hillary vs. McCain in 2012 and with Clark, Obama would have a lock in my opinion. I definitely don't want Hillary as VP because I think that would really tick me off with the more experienced woman as number two to the inexperienced young man/empty suit.

Of others, let's see. Gore or Kerry, uh, no. Any repub, uh, big no. Bill Richardson, well, I kind of hope so (see above), but not if you want to win. I'm not sure about any senator actually, but there may be some.

and how can some 70 year old Southern Conservative mean change? They've been floating him for VP for months now, but he makes almost as little sense as Hagel. If you want military experience, pick Wes Clark.

do not remember him fondly and would be against the idea. Bad idea IMO. Surprised that Clark's name isn't mentioned on any of the short lists that I have seen. Hands down better than Webb for VP position.

Vividly. I remember him leading a gang of photographers around the inside of a submarine, demonstrating how close the quarters are . . . it was supposed to convince the public that there was good reason why hetero guys just could not serve knowing that a gay man might be inches away!

is trying to put at least one Southern state in play, and GA and NC look to be the only possibilities and those two pols the only way to get there.

Edwards certainly would undermine, in an awkward way, O's message of Change. But he is popular, or at least not unpopular, with the Dem base, and has some national appeal and name rec.

Nunn is rather an unappealing unlikable old codger type and an insider hardball player. He too undermines Change and New Politics.

I'd much prefer to see Gen Clark over Nunn if O is looking to shore up NS creds.

10 days for Clark in campaign boot camp where he would be debriefed intensively on a range of domestic issues, followed by 10 more days of testing, simulated debating, and rapid fire questioning about SS, UHC, the economy and so forth. Should be good to go by then.

I saw this last night and thought leaving out Hillary was either a message that she wasn't on the list, or that he wanted us to know in fact he was not considering her and wanted to permanently squelch the notion, period, or that even the mention of her name would dredge up some scintilla of hope for her supporters, oh my goodness,did I really say that?

And the reason is the Congressional Black Caucus was heavily lobbying this appointment for Hillary as Veep, but there's no mention of that at all. Of course even AP was quilty of throwing Hillary off the bus.

CBC meeting to mend fences with Obama, there was many who stated they wanted Hillary for VP. Jesse Jackson, Jr., Obama campaign co-chair, was said to say no to the idea. Due to his position with the campaign, I can't see him doing this without Obama's approval.

Don't think Nunn would be the VP for Change I Can Believe In. I get a kick out of people who are suggesting Gore for VP. For the life of me I can't think of one reason why Gore would want the job. He has so much status on his own right now playing second banana to Obama doesn't seem like a move up IMO. Can't say that the other names proposed in that article would make me want to vote for Obama.

BTW has anyone else seen the article about Jim Webb bucking Obama on off shore drilling. Webb has signed on with Sen. Warner to sponsor a bill to allow Virginia an exception to do off shore exploration for natural gas. Wonder what effect that has on Webb's position on the VP short list.

If Edwards accepts VP again I think you could say there will be a lot of Democrats murmuring under their breath, "What an opportunist and a slick snake oil salesman (the hair)." The guy failed twice at a Presidential run. If he was picked instead of Hillary it would be because he's window dressing. As we all know as charming as Hillary is, she'd never be considered merely a prop.

be a head feint, and there's some stealth candidate out there who will be floated after Obama assesses the feedback he gets on the names that are now trickling out. Another part of me thinks that if they are floating these names, it's probably because they are being seriously considered.

Some thoughts:

If it's Sam Nunn, there goes any argument that John McCain is too old to be the president, as Nunn is 70.

It makes no sense to put someone on the ticket who isn't going to be the party's nominee in 4 years or 8 years - it's reminds me of nothing so much as Obama having a learner's permit and not being able to drive without "Dad" in the car.

I guess we see now why Edwards endorsed Obama - he wants to be president so bad he can taste it and this is his last chamce. As someone who started out as an Edwards supporter, I can only say that I wish I thought he wanted this because he knew it was the only way to be in a position to help the American people, but I'm pretty sure there's a lot of personal ambition there, too.

If Obama isn't going to pick Hillary, Edwards is probably the only chance we have to get universal health care - which is a big deal.

It's personal ambition for all of them, what bothered me was the games behind the scenes. Edwards campaign guy said their strategy was to take out Clinton. Edwards thought he could beat Obama.

Clinton and Obama are campaigning together next week. I'm sure she is allowing herself to be used... but who knows, maybe they will team up effectively. The pres selects the goals for the admin, it would be new for a VP to be given a specific issue.

The idea of Clinton as VP will be in the media and discussed incessantly. My bet is this is a test to see how everyone reacts. If the press is good and people love them together (as I think they actually will) then he will have no reason not to pick her. There are a couple decent alternate VP choices (Clark, for instance), but none match up to Hillary. They are floating these names like Nunn, Edwards, Gore just to gauge reaction and will be doing the same with Hillary. I am going to trust that the Obama campaign is smart enough to make the right decision.

In fact I wouldn't be surprised if Nunn's people insisted on the leak, what with him surfacing in public lately, trying to erase memory of his DADT stunt and how it thoroughly undermined his party's new president.

The more optimistic take would be that either the CBC just wanted to put something out for reporter lagniappe (whatever happened to close to the vest?) and figured those two names would be innocuous enough —right on Edwards, dead wrong on Nunn— or someone's really pushing for Nunn so hard that s/he has to be convinced that it's a non-starter with the public. Hope the FISA disaster and Scotty's star turn today don't drown out the outrage.

Unfortunately, this being the second act of the Mayberry Machiavellis we got going on here, my bet is that it's either Nunn or the field.

in my opinion are under serious consideration. They're not dumb enough to play that card just yet. Their real choices, the real shortlist is being held close to the vest. These names are just out there to spur debate, keep the Presidential Candidate Obama (you know, the one who's now making Big Decisions like this) in the news and help keep people off the track of who's REALLY on the list.

Regardless who he chooses, the person will still have a resume which makes Obama's look thin by comparison. And the GOP will jump all over that.

I think your quite right about them floating names to spur debate. I also actually, once again, think it's all about Hillary. The more names they float and the more vetting they do the better I say. Until proven otherwise I choose to believe that they are doing this so that they can pick Hillary as VP in the end and show that valiant efforts were made to actually pick the best person as VP and, after an extensive search, believe that she is the best pick.

Maybe I'm off base but I hope not. I think there must be a larger plan here.

The Hillary-Hate you see in the blogs comes straight from the Top and there's no way Barack and his handlers are going to allow Hillary the VP spot.

The floating of names is not only to spur debate, but to also muddy the waters, so to speak, by crowding the "Who Could Be VP?" field with more possibilities thereby -- hopefully -- helping people to forget Hillary.

Getting voters to think about possibilities OTHER than Hillary helps move them away from having to chose her.

There's no way they're giving the VP Spot to Hillary. Obama isn't confident enough in his abilities or resume -- and neither is the DNC -- to place someone on the ticket who is heads upon heads and shoulders upon shoulders better than him.

thing gets more entertaining by the day. could he possibly twist himself into any more shapes? he's making a pretzel look straight, by comparison.

"hope and change", "a new kind of politics", blah, blah, blah. who was stupid enough to buy into this nonsense? at this stage of the game (and it's still early yet!), i don't think he even has a clue what the heck he's talking about any more.

in fairness to bill clinton, DADT was an improvement over the witch hunting engaged in, prior to its enactment. i spoke out against both DADT & DOMA publicly, and was damned to hell by nearly every preacher in town. the only thing missing were the angry townspeople, pitchforks and lit torches in hands, on our front yard.

that said, it's time to put the kibosh on both, but don't expect that from a pres. obama, he's certainly shown no leadership on either issue.

some real fun if O pulled an Adlai and decided to throw open his Veep pick to the convention. Even ABC would probably be willing at that point to cover the entire evening's proceedings. Things could get real inneresting.

Wasn't Kefauver though a bit of an improvement over Adlai's 1952 pick of the segregationist Alabamian Sparkman?

"I asked them what type of person the senator is looking for? And they said in general someone who could help him rebuild the country ... talking about change. How we reinvest in America, get people back to work and reinforce our education system and bring the jobs back," she said.

They will pick someone who improves Obama's electability, someone who can deliver an otherwise undeliverable group or state. It won't be about "change" or "health care" or any other agenda. It will be about how to get elected.

As an aside, what qualifies Caroline Kennedy for this important position???? No insult to her personally, but what the heck??

As I compile a list of the ten worst choices for vice president, Sam Nunn leads the pack, hands down. Nunn was a bane for President Clinton and, would certainly be for a President Obama. "Change" does not seem, to me, to entail the plucking out from a decade-old retirement, a predictable right-winger, masquerading as a senior statesman. Nunn should stick to his retirement avocation of disarming stray nuclear weapons, where his destructive tendencies are actually helpful.

Its all - who is this guy besides being someone who opposed gays in the military.

Actually he is doing enormously good and valuable work as a leader in the nucelar disarmament movement. He has enormous credibility in that field, and his advocacy has been very courageous. It would be wonderful to have him injected into the center of the national security debate.

I would very much hope that he has evolved along with the rest of the country on gay issues, or, failing that, that he is willing to accept the leadership of others on those matters. His views of 15 years ago are unacceptable, but they may well have changed, and his value on other issues is enormous.

the GOP and the Media will have a field day painting him as the guy who -- 15 years ago -- was a driving force for DADT.

And with gay marriage and the rights entailed with that bond now in the news -- and sure to be during the Election as well --, his views (and, thus, his running mate Obama's views) will be open to questioning, open to interpretation and open to the public mauling via the GOP it will get.

Not to say the GOP will be pro-gay suddenly. They don't have to be. All they need to do is cast doubt on where the Obama/Nunn ticket stand and they'll turn off those on-the-fence voters who would rather stay home than vote for someone who may be homophobic or not interested in championing civil rights.

what the media and GOP do. They can do whatever they want to. I am sick and tired of liberals and Democrats living in fear of what the big bad media and 527s do. The way to defeat them is to go right ahead and do what is in your interest and leave 'em in your wake.

His views on gay matters may be open to question, but he would, if he were the choice, do what all VPs do, and fudge the issue in some eloquent way which gets across the message that he will support whatever the administration decides, and, by the way, I am here to talk about other issues.

Anyone who decides not to support a Democratic ticket because the VP was anti-gay rights 15 years ago, is not thinking very clearly. I mean after all, only 10 years before Bill chose Al Gore, Gore was saying things like :" "I think it is wrong," and then adding, "I don't pretend to understand it, but it is not just another normal optional life style."

In 1984, he said, according to the Nashville Tennessean, "I do not believe it is simply an acceptable alternative that society should affirm." He also said then that he opposed the Gay Bill of Rights and that he would not take campaign funds from gay groups.

People change, as society does. THere has been a huge evolution in societal norms, and I think Nunn should have a chance to show that he has been part of that.

you don't have to care what the GOP and he Media will do, but most Americans base their beliefs on a candidate on what they read, hear and see daily, so it does matter.

How else could someone who served with distinction in the military and was awarded Purple Hearts be so affected by the Purple Band-aid swiftboating? If they can do that with John Kerry, just imagine what they'll do with Obama and Nunn.

But, yes, if Barack and his Team decide Nunn is the absolute best choice for him, then, by all means, he should do what he wants to do. Doesn't mean people have to vote for him.

Votes are earned, not gifted because there's a (D) after someone's name.

I have the feeling that Elizabeth will put her foot down on this one....

as for sam nunn.... well, I'm just glad I've reached the age where casual hookups are no longer a part of my life --- because back when they were, I had a policy of "no gay republicans".... and if Sam Nunn was the nominee, I'd have to exclude "gay Democrats" too... ;)

who would draw the white working class voters though. I don't think Carloine Kennedy or Eric Holder are probably particularly insightful on that front either - especially in the South and the Appalachian region - Kennedy may have some academic understanding of the importance of Appalachia as her Dad and uncles both courted the people who lived there during their time - but her understanding wouldn't be more than academic - and these folks are culturally different from the New England working class folks in some important ways.

Either you get a wine that doesn't wash the taste of the Cowpat out of your mouth, or you get a wine that can get rid of the bad taste, but keeps reminding you that you are being forced to eat Cowpats in order to get the decent wine.

read too much into this. This is just a story of names some members of the CBC asked Kilpatrick to float to the Veep search committee. I'm sure there are other members of the CBC who floated other names as well. Edwards and Nunn were already on the "short list" so they are not new names. I doubt Obama would pick Nunn for reasons already mentioned by others including the fact that it makes no sense to name someone who is 70 years old and couldn't run for the office at the end of your term.

float out two names, one being someone that has a long record to be chopped up by the left and the right, the other a shorter record with less controversy. Let the left voters vomit over the controversial candidate and the one you pick suddenly seems a lot more palatabe. Not one complaint about Edwards here, seems to me it is working.

I mean, he's been an Obot from WAY back -- he's the guy who was "concerned" that Edwards should be staying home after Elizabeth acknowledged that her cancer was back.

Quite frankly, Edwards would go WAY down in my estimation if he were to accept the VP slot. I can see how he could justify runnng for President for the sake of his children's future, even though it meant less time with his wife and family... but running for VP when Elizabeth is dealing with cancer is simply wrong.

I had no idea what change candidate Sam Nunn has been up to, so I did some research, and found some interesting info on Wikepdedia.

Basically, he has been active with think tanks and academia with emphasis on addressing the issues of nuclear and biological weapons proliferation.

Currently the co-chairman and Chief Executive Officer of the Nuclear Threat Initiative (NTI), a charitable organization working to reduce the global threats from nuclear, biological and chemical weapons,
In addition to his work with NTI, Nunn has continued his service in the public policy arena as a distinguished professor in the Sam Nunn School of International Affairs at Georgia Tech. There, he hosts the annual Sam Nunn Policy Forum, a policy meeting that brings together noted academic, government, and private-sector experts on technology, public policy, and international affairs to address issues of immediate importance to the nation.

Additionally, Nunn serves as Chairman of the Board of Trustees for the Center for Strategic and International Studies in Washington, D.C.

I was surprised to find out he has been nominated for 3 Nobel Peace prizes in and around that work.

Along with Republican Senator Richard Lugar, co-author of the Nunn-Lugar Cooperative Threat Reduction, Nunn's work to "strengthen global security by reducing the risk of use and preventing the spread of nuclear, biological and chemical weapons," has resulted in at least three nominations for the Nobel Peace Prize in 2000, 2002 and 2005.

On the less than positive side,

Nunn is a board member of the following publicly held corporations: Chevron Corporation, The Coca-Cola Company, Dell Computer Corporation, General Electric Company.

And Former President Jimmy Carter, in an interview published June 4, 2008 by the Guardian, said that he favors Nunn as Obama's VP, as does columnist and Reagan and George HW Bush speechwriter Peggy Noonan.

Note his "bi-partisan" streak - Cohen and Lugar. Probably an attraction for Team O.

for the pic that appeared on the FP of the NYTimes during the DADT fiasco. it was of Nunn poking his pointed head out of a bunk on a submarine with the intent of pointing out just how close the poor straight soldiers would have to sleep to those dangerous homos if Clinton got his way.
I will never forget that and I will vote for McCain if he is on the ticket.

Well, we certainly wouldn't want part of the team that gave us...... THE GREATEST ECONOMIC EXPANSION IN HISTORY,...... or 8 years of...... PEACE & PROSPERITY, ......now would we.

No, instead let's disrespect women even more than we have already. Let's chose the 2 MALE candidates for Pres & Veep, and give the candidate with the experience, knowledge, maturity, and the MOST VOTES another slap in face.

that this is a smokescreen. Edwards is, with all deference to his efforts and supporters, a 3-time loser. Nunn is a sop to the likes of Carter and Noonan...NOONAN????? WTF cares what that dizzy dame thinks, or that other semi-blonde William "My-Dad-and-Mum-Were-Trotsykites" Kristol.

Obama will never throw the choice open to the convention, as it will result in civil war, given that roughly half the delegates will be Hillary supporters and half will be ...non-Hillary supporters.